US Consumers Clueless About Online Tracking 228
Arashtamere writes "A study on consumer perceptions about online privacy, undertaken by the Samuelson Clinic at the University of California and the Annenberg Public Policy Center, found that the average American consumer is largely unaware that every move they make online can be, and often is, tracked by online marketers and advertising networks. Those surveyed showed little knowledge on the extent to which online tracking is happening or how the information obtained can be used. More than half of those surveyed — about 55 percent — falsely assumed that a company's privacy polices prohibited it from sharing their addresses and purchases with affiliated companies. Nearly four out of 10 online shoppers falsely believed that a company's privacy policy prohibits it from using information to analyze an individuals' activities online. And a similar number assumed that an online privacy policy meant that a company they're doing business with wouldn't collect data on their online activities and combine it with other information to create a behavioral profile."
Disclaimers aside... (Score:4, Insightful)
Privacy is about more than legal compliance, it's fundamentally about user trust. Be transparent with your users about your privacy practices. If your users don't trust you, you're out of business.
Re:Disclaimers aside... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Disclaimers aside... (Score:4, Insightful)
This is what your run-of-the-mill Slashbot fails to grasp. Most people just don't care. And any attempt at educating family and friends (or the masses) goes in one ear and out the other.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Heck, I not only don't care. I don't understand people who do.
Exactly what is the issue with advertisers using this information to create a behavioural profile? These are all behaviours you are exhibiting in public. Believe it or not, your friends, co-workers, and the cute blonde waitress at the coffee shop have all creat
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's the direct equivalent to conducting focused surveillance on you, your family, your friends. This is normally the domain of the police, and PI's who do it have to obide by license terms, but suddenly technology has reduced the cost to a point private companies can now do it.
it's outrageous, and represents and invasion of privacy.
If individuals do it instead of corporations they are subjected to prosecution under anti-stalking laws, but apparently you think it's fine as long as it's a c
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
Personally, I know and fully understand online tracking and all the privacy implications and yet I still don't care. Hell, if "they" can figure out a way to replace the generic tampon commercials with targeted adverts for the newest Aston Martin I'm a happy guy.
Re: (Score:2)
One thing I don't like about this whole targeted ad business is that more often than not they miss the mark with oddballs like me. Take Amazon for instance, they keep pitching the same dreg to me all the time because they do this "users that got X also got Y" thing. While it does rarely recommend something I might be interested, it mostly tries to shove crap I wouldn't waste more than two seconds looking at.
But the biggest downside is that someone, somewhere is deciding what sort of stuff expose me to. If
Re: (Score:2)
Someone, Somewhere doesn't exist. It's an algorithm. A programmer/marketeer tweak the program and adjust according to the returns. Basically what I'm saying is:
Re:Disclaimers aside... (Score:5, Insightful)
And, no I don't think brainwashing is a harsh word to use. Ads are designed specially to make you buy products you otherwise wouldn't, mostly by making you feel more familiar and comfortable with the product. Many slashdot readers probably think that they are above getting tricked by commercials, but that is the delusion that adcompanies want you to believe. Intelligence doesn't matter into it, because ads plays on more primal instincts. The only way to get away from it is to avoid the ads completly.
One common argument for ads is that they inform you of products, but that is a very weak argument. Ads are very rarely informative. Information in general is better left to 3d party reviews. Of course, with the reach of todays marketing departments it is difficult to know how influenced the 3d party reviewers are, but it is atleast trying.
So how do this tie in with online tracking. It is simple, The more accuratly that they can advertise products that you could be convinced into buying, the more powerfully they are able to change your opinions.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That w
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, wait. I haven't."
Of course not. The point of advertising isn't to convince you to buy products that you never would buy otherwise. Most everyone could see through that. The real point of advertising a product, is that the next time you go to the store to buy a product of that type, you will buy the advertised brand inst
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Unfortunately, this shows that the users do not know enough not to trust online services. Also unfortunately, (often) the only way to remove yourself from the grasp of these people is to opt out of their services, which is bad business and bad service.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm probably still being tracked its just that the amount of tracking info is limited to 1 session. The
Re: (Score:2)
Our surveys (see story above) show that customers don't give a rat's ass as long as it's cheap.
U. S. Consumers Clueless ... (Score:2, Interesting)
>" US Consumers Clueless About Online Tracking"
US Consumers Clueless.
There, fixed it for you.
Really, its not just online tracking ... there are SO many things, from food packaging and labeling to software to car mileage figures to taxes to rights.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There, fixed it for you without being a troll.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Who else would vote a ape in as president?
Re:U. S. Consumers Clueless ... (Score:5, Insightful)
You're absolutely right. Pretty much all consumers are clueless. No wonder - their chief source of information about a product is advertising.
Look at how many by sugar water labeled as "Grape Drink" or "Orange Drink", thinking that there must be real juice in it, because they won't take the time to read the label, and manufacturers aren't required to state in bold letters "THIS IS NOT REAL FRUIT JUICE". Or "Best mileage in its class!" - which really means "it sucks gas, so we made a 'class' with others that suck even more for bogus comparison purposes". Or "dermatologist - recommended". Or the P4s that were, clock tick for clock tick, slower than the P3s, but would "enhance your multimedia experience."
Maybe public education should include classes in Critical Analysis of Ad Claims 101 and Weasel Word Composition.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:U. S. Consumers Clueless ... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
> It's funny how the slashbots think they're so superior and more intelligent than the general public.
I've spent enough time explaining to others the difference between sugar water labeled "Orange Drink" and real orange juice. Has nothing to do with intelligence, just healthy cynicism and a knowledge of some of the restrictions on labeling which have appeared in the media.
> Meanwhile you people go apeshit over the latest Apple product, Intel processor or Linux gadget.
Sorry, but I don't own a s
Who did this study? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
But... (Score:2, Funny)
Nobody could ever get that information.
astonishing (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:astonishing (Score:5, Insightful)
A very valid point. The solutions to most of the Internet's privacy problems lie in software design, such as default encryption and anomymizing of traffic. Although nobody can force Microsoft to create a half decent browser, or anything else for that matter, we can at least encourage open source software developers to reduce the end-user's internet fingerprint. Sure, anyone who is interested in not being followed around on the 'net can achieve this by installing a couple of firefox plugins and so on, but the way for the privacy conscious to protect themselves best is to encourage everyone else to do the same.
If we consider privacy infringement being akin to getting syphilis, then apart from not using the internet (abstinence), or installing and configuring extra software (condoms, which fall off, or don't get used in the first place), the only option is to supply people with genitalia which is pre-shrink-wrapped, if you get my drift.
You can't make people use encryption by default (Score:3, Interesting)
Look at the way SSL is mis-used almost constantly across the web. Even most "techies" don't get it because the concepts are counter-intuitive (even if very simple). SSL certificates and CAs were created to ensure that the domain name you typed-in is the real holder of that domain name. But techies generally think that SSL certs were supposed to validate a site's overall identity or business ethics, and they "know" that SSL has "failed
Re: (Score:2)
There is a reason why the lock appears in the address bar, because it validates that you are connected with the real holder of that address.
Checking credentials and so forth is a different matter from preventing the user from being tracked and profiled. If all traffic was encrypted, then it goes a step towards genuine net neutrality. Your ISP can't profile you and the warning "you are about to send data across an unencrypted connection" would nolonger be a nag but useful.
As for trust, well this is a problem in any market place. Online money transactions should be handled directly by the companies that handle money, in my opinion (eg: your b
Re: (Score:2)
Checking credentials and so forth is a different matter from preventing the user from being tracked and profiled.
This isn't true, because encryption between people who never physically meet is meaningless without a mechanism to identify the remote party. Without the latter, the ISP could easily do MITM without the user being any the wiser.
A trust-less encryption scheme (one without a trust mechanism) is just like DRM where everyone is given the key along with the data and expected to just "be good".
And that I am having to explain this on a "tech" site underlines my point in other posts on this topic: Most techies do
In Canada ... (Score:3, Interesting)
US consumers are clueless about technology (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Word
Office
Intel
IBM
"the one with the icons"
or my personal favorite
"What do you mean "which one?", I have a computer!"
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Anyway, please, I'm begging you, how did you solve this? And I've unfortunately already ruled out homicide.
Re:US consumers are clueless about technology (Score:5, Insightful)
You'd think that if someone is going to buy a car, that they would know everything a certified mechanic knew.
Or, maybe the people that you talked to when you were tech support were just using their computers for entertainment and have neither the need nor the desire to "get under the hood" of the computer.
Typically people in tech support forget that they are paid to support the person calling them, not the other way around. I understand dealing with the public can be a pain in the ass, but if you don't like it, do your profession and the public a favor and quit.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
> person if they know simple computer concepts such as partitioning and operating systems...
As a tech person, perhaps you think regular consumers should be able to partition their hard drives, but for most people computers and hi-tech gadgets are tools no matter how prevalent or even how important they are in our lives. They don't care how their hard drives are virtually divided for use by their OS, and why should th
Re: (Score:2)
I got that. But isn't it important to know how your tools work, how to take care of them?
I don't necessarily expect the "regular consumer" to know how to partition a hard drive, at least without googling a bit. But I think it's reasonable to expect someone who uses computers to ha
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I think it would have done more good to ask GP whether people should learn how to use and maintain their hammers, screwdrivers, wrenches, or even guns, before being allowed to potentially do serious damage to themselves or others with them.
And with that, I'll pose that question. So, onefriedrice, should they? And, if so, why, then, should they not learn the basics of, and how to use and maintain their multi-ton killing machinnes (vehicles) or machines capable of being hijacked and use
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Does that make you any more clueless? no. Simply uninterested in the workings of a particular bit of technology. Just as you can point to things those people are disinterested in figuring out in a higher level of detail, I can find a similar number of things you would be disin
Re: (Score:2)
Pardon, but do you have any clue how the SIM card in your phone or the data stripe on your credit card are partitioned? Do you care, regardless of how important a phone or a credit card is to you? no. It's a black box
I think this is a topic where the automobile analogy is far more appropriate. And FWIW people's cars are almost never regarded as black boxes by them. In fact they had to take classes just to learn to use the roadways.
OTOH we have millions of people 'driving' on the info superhighway who don't look over their shoulder or check the mirror when they make a lane change (i.e. they may look for the SSL lock, but don't check the domain name that its validating). Extremely simple procedures make all the differenc
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Any doctor or average housewife who insists on treating their computer as a blackbox while expecting to be delivered from insecurity is an arrogant boob, and I'm afraid that accurately characterizes not only most Internet denizens, but also about 70% of the "tech" community as
The person on the other end of the phone... (Score:2)
Gets paid a lot more than you do to be an expert salesman, lawyer, accountant, business exec, etc...
If they knew computers the way you did:
IBM made a killing with their consultants because they pushed
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
- How to drive like an asshole"
Don't forget:
- How to drive and talk or even drive and text at the same time.
Oh, and generalizations make you a moron, which means you clearly belong here in the USA. Please report to the nearest airport. (On the off chance that you're a durkadurkasthani, try not to bomb it)
Why yes, I did just contradict myself 3 or more times. I can't be bothered to count, though, and I probably wouldn't be a
Not just online tracking... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not just online tracking... (Score:5, Informative)
I can tell you that as popular as this myth is, VISA is not generally able to track what you purchase. Generally, all they know is where you shopped and how much you spent, not what individual items you spent on.
The nearest there is to an exception to this is in hotels and fleet card purchases -- in the case of Hotels, VISA gets a breakdown of what money was spent on the room vs the room service vs the hotel lobby store, etc. Still doesn't know what actual items were purchased, but they do get told your check-in and check-out dates and some other things. For fleet card they might get told how many gallons of gas you purchased, but that's about it.
I know, I grew up thinking VISA was watching me, too, but it turns out it's just not watching that closesly. It doesn't have the capability; the protocols whereby credit card information are transferred just don't have any specification for that level of reporting.
I can believe VISA isn't watching. (Score:2)
They don't have to when the government has all the help they need [slashdot.org] from the likes of VeriSign.
No Real Surprise (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I read them. PayPal lost a potential customer when I read theirs.
-:sigma.SB
every third slashdot story (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We could leave more room for other stories if we just ran more more titled simply "U.S. Consumers Clueless"
i keep waiting for the day (Score:3, Insightful)
and honestly? i side with the average guy on the street with (non)this issue. the average guy on the street looks at the data generated from his random meanderings on the web as useless, unimportant, and not a matter of privacy. and you know what?: he's right. frankly, that some database might know what i visited on eBay, then amazon.com, then netflix is not some horrible raping of my psyche. it really isn't
someone could track the wanderings of people around the supermarket too. is that information deeply personal to you? it is? so then that means you define your deeply personal identity based on what aisle you walk down in in the supermarket? pffft
then they use that information to pitch DVD titles at you, or pasta, or a hallmark card
oh my god. some database knows i bought pepto bismol. now it wants to sell me toilet paper. MY PERSONAL IDENTITY HAS BEEN HORRIBLY RAPED. I HAVE BEEN DEHUMANIZED AND DEMEANED. MY SENSE OF SELF-WORTH IS LOWERED. IT'S ORWELL'S 1984
pfffffffffft
next nonissue please
Re: (Score:2)
Its not just the crap that they'll market to you. You can ignore that. Its the stuff that you can't have because, quite frankly, you live in the wrong neighborhood.
Re:i keep waiting for the day (Score:5, Insightful)
It isn't when it's some third-party non-important entity looking at your surfing habits. However, it is very much an issue when the government decides that because you are waiving your Constitutional rights [slashdot.org] they can subpoena that same information to use as part of their illegal nationwide net of information on citizens.
I'm sorry if YOU are lumped in with the general uncaring public about something that shouldn't be the business of any group of Marketers, government agencies, or anyone except
Thanks for offering me the chance to bite, I enjoy it sometimes.
the fallacy of the slippery slope (Score:2)
if you let homosexual men marry, next you will have to make pedophilia, rape, incest, bestiality and necrophilia legal
do you believe that? i will take a guess and say no
such a thought, is, of course, complete bullshit: people can tell the difference between a gay man and a corpse fucker
but in the mind of some social conservatives, THEY REALLY BELIEVE THIS
why? because their slippery slope argument really is not
Re: (Score:2)
Re:i keep waiting for the day (Score:5, Insightful)
If you are not the normal consumer of your Pepto Dismal purchases, please fill out the attached "Not A Regular Consumer" form to identify said user and your HPPR will be returned to the normal-risk group.
Sincerely,
Your Health Insurance Extortionist [msn.com]
Re: (Score:2)
What?! Don't you know how important we are? Our opinions are teh educated ones! We know how online tracking works and the general public doesn't. Therefore, online tracking is important. Very important. We have concerns and everyone should listen to us and -- this is crucial -- value our understanding. Our understanding must be acknowledged and accorded status. Because we are importa
yeah they care (Score:2)
they care with the same gusto you do when some guy at a party goes "i'm telling you, you want to see my brother's band play tomorrow night"
"oh yeah, sounds great, i'll be there, it's important to me, i care"
no they don't. they "care" because they're taking a survey where the issue they don't know about, are not involved in, and never heard about before is being shoved in their face
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sensationalist privacy zealots are afraid of their own shadow. They live in a world that is about to break down their door for god only knows or cares what. Why the paranoia? Are you doing something that someone should care about?
I look at porn, I shop online, I've bought a butt plug online before...do you feel more powerful for knowing that? Do I feel guilty, ashamed, or concerned with the fact that you know this? No, so why would anyone else care? If so
Re:i keep waiting for the day (Score:4, Insightful)
You can never have a career in public politics.
When times are tough and you find yourself desperate enough to take any job to feed your children, you won't have a chance at companies run by members of the 'moral majority' who decide to do background checks.
Pray you are lucky enough that neither of those, nor any number of other scenarios ever come about for you personally. But unless the useful idiots like yourself get a clue, its guaranteed to happen to more than enough people to damage our society.
Re: (Score:2)
They care so much that they don't bother to find out whether they are tracked.
When people really care about something, they do something about it. Folks will say they care about things when you ask them. In reality, they don't.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In this state, we have a whole government department dedicated to making it rise. Pepsico and TIAA/CREF almost stopped it from rising last year, but the budget was increased just in time and the Dept. of Light and Warmth fought them off.
This year, the cold-hearted forces of darkness want to cut the budget to only 129% of last year's budget. I'm worried about the sun's chances and I told them so when they surveyed me.
important moral question (Score:3, Funny)
I'm in a quandry. I see policemen beating lawyers on the streets in Pakistan.
How should I be feeling?
Thanks,
A concerned citizen.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm in a quandry. I see policemen beating lawyers on the streets in Pakistan. How should I be feeling?
That's a tough call. You should already be depressed, worried, upset, mad, and overall just frickin' pissed off at the terrible rape in the Congo [thenation.com] (or even the U.S. [google.com]), the starvation in Somalia [globalsecurity.org] (or North Korea [209.157.64.201], mothers dying around the world from a condition that can be treated simply and cheaply [engenderhealth.org], incredible pollution in China [wired.com] and everywhere else [esa.int], intense economic inequality in Latin America [iht.com] and how it's d [confectionerynews.com]
Re: (Score:2)
When it comes to human rights, NEVER compare any situation to something worse, only to what it should be, and try to improve what you can, even if it is not that important, instead of complaining on what you can't change.
My worst offender? ACLU! (Score:5, Informative)
When donating them money in 2006, I specified a "special" address, which contained "from ACLU" in the "Line 1" of the address. The actual address went to "Line 2" of their form. I do this with all establishments I'm dealing with — just in case.
A month or so later invitations to subscribe to "The Nation" (a disgusting uber-Left rag) started showing up bearing the "from ACLU" address...
Now, I expected the ACLU to be bi-partisan — and concerned with my privacy. Asking me for money the next year is fair game. But sharing my info with other — completely unrelated — organizations? Very disappointing...
Somehow, nothing but parcels from Amazon has shown up bearing the "from Amazon" address.
Re:My worst offender? ACLU! (Score:4, Insightful)
Hah!
Hah! Hah!
Same experience (Score:2)
Maybe ACLU sent in on behalf of The Nation? (Score:2)
This is quite common practice and often there are two opt-ins (or outs) on applications: "allow us to share your information with our partners" and "allow us to send you information on behalf of ou
Re: (Score:2)
Not a surprise, but (Score:5, Insightful)
Some (GOogle) will say that the privacy policy explains all this. Humbug! First you have to follow a link to find the policy. Second the lawyers and marketeers have obfuscated what is really being done. Further, they can change the policy without notice. When they change you have to know they have changed and then go and read the new policy. How one is supposed to know when no notice is provided is a mystery.
All in all, Google is doing a lot of evil if you believe in personal privacy. They are an invasive collector of personal data and they hide the extent and nature of what they are doing. Google makes Microsoft bashful in their business practices.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Much as I like NoScript (Score:2)
Web bugs can also be used to track people. Using "ImgLikeOpera" with default set to load images for originating site only will largely skirt web bugs.
"Safe History" and "Clear Cache" are also good to have in Firefox.
And let us not forget Privoxy + Tor + Torbutton if you really want to be anonymous.
Re: (Score:2)
Clueless US citizens? No shit! (Score:2, Flamebait)
AT&T + NSA 0wns all your bases! (Score:3, Informative)
References:
1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-aQ_o_yi-s [youtube.com]
2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWW09xzJfS0 [youtube.com]
3) http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm [usatoday.com]
4) http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2006/06/the_newbies_gui.html?entry_id=1510938 [wired.com]
Anyone here surprised? (Score:2)
Now, this would be information and it's hard to make it infotainment, it's also nothing where you could get kids to call in to a 0900 number, so it has an icecube in hell chance to ever get there.
Also, who should push it the
Correction (Score:2)
Ha (Score:2)
Customers? (Score:2, Insightful)
We need to explicitly establish anti-mining laws. (Score:2)
And i don't care that theyre private companies, there are precedents which protect our constitutional rights even against private companies. They can't invade your privacy by putting cams in bathrooms. Apartment complexes and other renting landlords can't claim dominion over, break into, or otherwise disturb your house, your in-complex mailbox, or
We need more truth in labeling (Score:2)
Opt Me In!! (Score:2)
My fake mustache (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
No. But Firefox will let you block the cookies, or automatically erase them when you leave the program. And you can get the TrackMeNot plugin, which makes random searches on different search engines, so that when they pull your record up to see what you've been searching for, the real searches will be lost in the noise.
Re: (Score:2)
So it's not in mom's basement?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
fascism is characterized by placing the state and corporations over human rights.
meritocracy involve only allowing credentialed experts in a given field to craft policy for that field, cutting out clueless morons and parties like corporations who are by their very nature amoral and psychopathic, etc.
yes, the concept is flawed, but at the same time it's not really any more flawed than the concept of representative democratic republics.
I honestly think that